A79 PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN PERSPECTIVES ON IMPLEMENTION OF BEDSIDE INTESTINAL ULTRASOUND FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background New tools for evaluating Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) activity and complications are needed to deliver timely disease management and improve patient outcomes. Point of care (POC) intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is safe, inexpensive, and less invasive compared to standard endoscopy and imaging. Aims To evaluate the implementation of POC IUS within an ambulatory IBD clinic at the QEII Health Sciences Center. Methods This was a retrospective evaluation of a cohort of patients who had undergone IUS within the Nova Scotia Collaborative Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Clinic (NSCIBD) between January 18, 2023 and August 13, 2023. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Patient demographics, disease-related characteristics, perceived impact of IUS on need for endoscopy, perceived impact of IUS on IBD management, and clinical utility of IUS were collected. Surveys were administered prospectively to referring care providers and patients following IUS. Patient surveys assessed IUS satisfaction, acceptance of other methods to assess IBD activity, whether IUS improved knowledge of illness, and impact on quality of life (QoL). Results One physician completed 107 IUS exams on 92 patients at the NSCIBD clinic over a nine-month period. Of 92 patients, 47 (51%) were male and 78 (85%) had Crohn’s disease. 53 patients provided an email and consented to survey participation. 34 responses were submitted (64%). There were 97 responses (91%) from 12 referring gastroenterology specialist clinicians. Ninety-three percent of responses show IUS reports were very helpful (60%) or somewhat helpful (33%). More than a third (37%) of IUS exams were reported to delay or prevent the need for endoscopic evaluation, and 34% were reported to prompt a therapeutic change. Of available tools, IUS had the highest proportion of patients who felt it was completely acceptable (77%), compared to colonoscopy (41%), stool sampling (50%), blood tests (71%), and computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (47%). Most (89%) indicated IUS caused either no discomfort (68%) or little discomfort (21%), with no patient reporting a lot of discomfort. Some patients (41%) reported that IUS improved their understanding of their illness, and 38% believe it improved their QoL. Conclusions POC IUS offers an accurate, less invasive option for monitoring IBD activity compared to traditional investigations. There is limited data on implementation of, and patient and clinician perspectives regarding use of IUS and its clinical implications. Even early in implementation, POC IUS has clear benefits. This study suggests that IUS is highly acceptable to patients for investigating/monitoring their illness. Treating clinicians find significant value in IUS and report that it can prevent the need for endoscopic evaluation and prompt changes in therapeutic management. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».